Cruddas v Calvert & Ors

Cruddas v Calvert & Ors

Permission to amend the Particulars of Claim is granted in part. Amendments relevant to malice, damages, and the Claimant's knowledge are allowed where they could support a jury finding of malice or aggravation of damages. Amendments relying on intention to injure third parties, pursuit of own advantage, or irrelevant facts are disallowed. The balance of authority requires malice to be directed at the claimant, and evidence must be more consistent with malice than its absence.

Parties
Claimant: Peter Cruddas; Defendant: Jonathan Calvert; Defendant: Heidi Blake; Defendant: Times Newspapers Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 May 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil / Ruling on Application for Permission to Amend Particulars of Claim
Outcome
Application for permission to amend Particulars of Claim allowed in part; some amendments permitted, others refused.
Legal Topics
Libel, Malicious Falsehood, Pleadings Amendment, Malice, Summary Judgment, Damages
Defamation Tort Libel Malicious Falsehood Pleadings Amendment Malice Summary Judgment Damages

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Cruddas

Claimant

Jonathan Calvert

Defendant

Heidi Blake

Defendant

Times Newspapers Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Ruling on Application for Permission to Amend Particulars of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proposed amendments to Particulars of Claim should be allowed
  2. 2 Whether malice can be established by intention to injure parties other than the claimant
  3. 3 Whether certain pleaded facts are relevant to malice or damages

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to amend the Particulars of Claim is granted in part. Amendments relevant to malice, damages, and the Claimant's knowledge are allowed where they could support a jury finding of malice or aggravation of damages. Amendments relying on intention to injure third parties, pursuit of own advantage, or irrelevant facts are disallowed. The balance of authority requires malice to be directed at the claimant, and evidence must be more consistent with malice than its absence.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to amend Particulars of Claim allowed in part; some amendments permitted, others refused.

Orders

  • Claimant granted permission to amend Particulars of Claim as specified in judgment.
  • Certain proposed amendments disallowed as specified.